Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats Thought it was Improper to Filibuster Judicial Nominees
May 19, 2005 | FR Researchers

Posted on 05/19/2005 8:17:55 AM PDT by Peach

Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Delaware) March 19, 1997: “But I also respectfully suggest that everyone who is nominated is entitled to have a shot, to have a hearing and to have a shot to be heard on the floor and have a vote on the floor.”

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois)September 28, 1998: “We should meet our responsibility. I think that responsibility requires us to act in a timely fashion on nominees sent before us. ... Vote the person up or down.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California) September 11, 1997: “Let’s bring their nominations up, debate them if necessary, and vote them up or down.”

Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Massachusetts)February 3, 1998: “We owe it to Americans across the country to give these nominees a vote. If our Republican colleagues don’t like them, vote against them. But give them a vote.”

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) May 10, 2000: “The Founding Fathers certainly intended that the Senate advise as to judicial nominations, i.e., consider, debate, and vote up or down. They surely did not intend that the Senate, for partisan or factional reasons, would remain silent and simply refuse to give any advice or consider and vote at all.”

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) 5/14/97 : “It is not the role of the Senate to obstruct the process and prevent numbers of highly qualified nominees from even being given the opportunity for a vote on the Senate floor.”

Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD): “I find it simply baffling that a Senator would vote against even voting on a judicial nomination.” (Congressional Record, 10/5/99)

Sen. Tom Daschle (D-SD): “Hispanic or non-Hispanic, African American or non-African American, woman or man, it is wrong not to have a vote on the Senate floor.” (Congressional Record, 10/28/99)

Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND): “My expectation is that we’re not going to hold up judicial nominations. …You will not see us do what was done to us in recent years in the Senate with judicial nominations.” (Fox News’ “Special Report With Brit Hume,” 6/4/01)

Richard Durbin (D-IL) "If, after 150 days languishing on the Executive Calendar that name has not been called for a vote, it should be. Vote the person up or down." (Cong. Rec., 9/28/98, S11021)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA): “Let’s bring their nominations up, debate them if necessary, and vote them up or down.” (Congressional Record, 9/11/97)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA): “It is our job to confirm these judges. If we don’t like them, we can vote against them.” (Congressional Record, 9/16/99)

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA): “Our institutional integrity requires an up-or-down vote.” (Congressional Record, 10/4/99)

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA): “[The filibuster process] is used … as blackmail for one Senator to get his or her way on something that they could not rightfully win through the normal processes.” (Congressional Record, 1/4/95)

Tom Harkin (D-IA) "Have the guts to come out and vote up or down….And once and for all, put behind us this filibuster procedure on nominations." (Cong. Rec., 6/22/95, S8861)

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA): “I urge the Republican leadership to take the steps necessary to allow the full Senate to vote up or down on these important nominations.” (Congressional Record, 9/11/00)

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA): “We owe it to Americans across the country to give these nominees a vote. If our Republican colleagues don’t like them, vote against them. But give them a vote.” (Congressional Record, 2/3/98)

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA): “It is true that some Senators have voiced concerns about these nominations. But that should not prevent a roll call vote which gives every Senator the opportunity to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ ... Parties with cases, waiting to be heard by the federal courts deserve a decision by the Senate.” (Congressional Record, 9/21/99)

Sen. Herb Kohl (D-WI): “These nominees, who have to put their lives on hold waiting for us to act, deserve an ‘up or down’ vote.” (Congressional Record, 9/21/99)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT): “I hope we … will accept our responsibility and vote people up or vote them down. … If we want to vote against them, vote against them.” (Congressional Record, 10/22/97)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT): “Now, every Senator can vote against any nominee. … But it is the responsibility of the U.S. Senate to at least bring them to a vote.” (Congressional Record, 10/22/97)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT): “ "I have stated over and over again … that I would object and fight against any filibuster on a judge, whether it is somebody I opposed or supported …” (Congressional Record, 6/18/98)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT): “[E]arlier this year … I noted how improper it would be to filibuster a judicial nomination.” (Congressional Record, 10/14/98)

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT): “[I]f the person is otherwise qualified, he or she gets the vote. … Vote them up, vote them down.” (Congressional Record, 9/21/99)

Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV): “[W]e should have up-or-down votes in the committee and on the floor.” (CNN’s “Evans, Novak, Hunt & Shields,” 6/9/01)

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY): “[W]e are charged with voting on the nominees. The Constitution does not say if the Congress is controlled by a different party than the President there shall be no judges chosen.” (Congressional Record, 3/7/00)

Carl Levin (D-MI) "If a bipartisan majority of the U.S. Senate is prepared to vote to confirm the President's appointment, that vote should occur." (Cong. Rec., 6/21/95, S8806)


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 109th; cary; cnim; democrats; doublestandard; filibuster; filibusterquotes; flipflop; hypocracy; hypocritedemocrats; judicial; nominees; obstructionistdems; quotes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-170 next last
To: Arrowhead1952

I'm so glad you reminded me about that option; I'm going to start saving stuff there instead of Favorites.

It's a much smarter way to do it.


61 posted on 05/19/2005 9:11:44 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Ping! Thanks I've been looking for these!!!!


62 posted on 05/19/2005 9:22:28 AM PDT by dannyboy72 (How long will you hold onto the rope when Liberals pull us off the cliff?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Bump


63 posted on 05/19/2005 9:33:02 AM PDT by BROKKANIC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach
I'm on the fly this morning, and haven't had the time to read all the posts to this thread....but am I safe to assume that this list has been "certified" as totally legit?

If so, what ammunition!!

64 posted on 05/19/2005 9:35:08 AM PDT by ErnBatavia (I don't drink and FReep...it just looks that way)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia

The list was gathered from several conservative news organization's articles and freepers have compiled the entire list which details the date and where the comments were made.

I haven't independently verified the list, but unless 3-4 conservative news organizations are all using the same lies, then I'm assuming it's correct.

Also, we have enough media and trolls who visit here that if the list was incorrect, we'd be told by now. LOL


65 posted on 05/19/2005 9:37:05 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia

Most of them come straight out of the Congressional Record.


66 posted on 05/19/2005 9:40:17 AM PDT by OXENinFLA ("And that [Atomic] bomb is a filibuster" ~~~ Sen. Lieberman 1-4-95)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Peach

I just read this quickly and I have a question: Why were the Democrats making these comments? Were the Republicans trying to hold up votes?


67 posted on 05/19/2005 9:43:13 AM PDT by cantfindagoodscreenname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname

I don't know the answer to your question but assume that Republicans were holding up the vote of some Democrat nominee.


68 posted on 05/19/2005 9:44:51 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Forward this to Brit Hume.


69 posted on 05/19/2005 9:49:12 AM PDT by Kenny Bunkport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunkport

We need to ALL e-mail to Brit and Rush and the Judicial Committee. They won't read it until they get hundreds of copies.


70 posted on 05/19/2005 9:50:22 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Peach
At the time of those quotes the Republicans were unabashedly blocking every Clinton judicial appointment that they could by delaying committee hearings or refusing the schedule hearings at all. The Republicans had no problems blocking nominees then, and the Democrats were steaming. Now the shoe is on the other foot. The Democrats are blocking appointments and the GOP is suddenly indignant.
71 posted on 05/19/2005 9:50:47 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA

Great job OXEN!


72 posted on 05/19/2005 9:51:19 AM PDT by houeto ("Mr. President , close our borders now!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Then why do we keep hearing that it's never been done before? I'm not doubting you, just asking.


73 posted on 05/19/2005 9:52:01 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Peach
Then why do we keep hearing that it's never been done before? I'm not doubting you, just asking.

Filibustering judicial nominees never has been done before, although some claim that it was done with Abe Fortis back in the 1960's. But the GOP didn't need to filibuster. As the majority party they controlled the committee schedule. And Jesse Helms was chairman. So killing judicial nominees at the committee level was a piece of cake.

74 posted on 05/19/2005 9:55:46 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Peach

I guess that I wanted to know if they were doing the same thing that the Democrats are doing right now. I think Rush has been saying that the Democrats are the ones who started doing this six years ago and that it hadn't been done before this. Were the Republicans keeping the vote from getting out of committee so that it could go to a full vote in the Senate? (I know that you don't know, but I'm wondering if anyone else does.)


75 posted on 05/19/2005 9:56:22 AM PDT by cantfindagoodscreenname
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Add Colorado Senator Ken Salazar to the summary.

"I would hope all nominees get up or down votes," Salazar answered. "And the decision on an up-or-down vote should be based on whether or not the president's nominee is qualified for the position."

Source: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/3/26/1020/90795


76 posted on 05/19/2005 9:58:38 AM PDT by mpreston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mpreston

Good find. Thank you!


77 posted on 05/19/2005 9:59:32 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname
Were the Republicans keeping the vote from getting out of committee so that it could go to a full vote in the Senate? (I know that you don't know, but I'm wondering if anyone else does.)

Yes. The majority party runs the Judiciary Committee, and the chairman runs the schedule. One one or two occasions nominees that had been voted out of committee were blocked by Senator Helms. Not a single one of these actions violated any Senate rule. But then again, neither does the filibuster.

78 posted on 05/19/2005 10:00:22 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Great list. But the Republicans weren't filibustering, they were holding the names in committee and refusing to send them to the floor.


79 posted on 05/19/2005 10:00:48 AM PDT by lady lawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mpreston

"Should we take our time on these federal judges? Yes. Do I have any apologies? Only one: I probably moved too many already." -- Trent Lott, 1998


80 posted on 05/19/2005 10:01:45 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 161-170 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson